Conflict- Related Sexual Violence As A Tactic Of Warfare In Non-International Armed Conflict: A Critical Analysis
Authored by:
M. H Umesha Rangani Ranathunga, Attorney-at-Law (LLB/LLM) Sri Lanka, PGDip(Canada), PQHRM (Sri Lanka)
Abstract
Particularly in cases of non-international armed conflicts, conflict-related sexual violence is a grave breach of both international humanitarian law and international criminal law. The definition of conflict-related sexual assault as a ‘tactic of warfare’ is examined in this article along with its legal ramifications within the context of non-international armed conflicts. It analyses the extent to which sexual violence may be deliberately employed to achieve social, political and military objectives and examines the challenges associated with recognising such conduct under international law. This article further implies the protection afforded to victims and the development of international legal standards concerning sexual violence in non-international armed conflict. The phrase of warfare’ examines how such violence is planned and strategic in such situations. In addressing conflict-related sexual violence in non-international armed conflicts, this article explores the ongoing need for effective accountability, victim protection and uniform implementation of international legal standards.
Keywords: Conflict-related sexual violence, non-international armed conflicts, international humanitarian law, sexual violence, tactic of warfare, armed conflicts, warfare
This is a compelling and timely piece that tackles a subject too often sidelined in legal discourse. Framing conflict-related sexual violence as a deliberate "tactic of warfare"—rather than an incidental atrocity—is a crucial analytical shift, particularly in the non-international armed conflict context where accountability mechanisms are notoriously weak. The article's focus on the gap between legal standards and actual enforcement resonates deeply, especially given how rarely these crimes are prosecuted under international law. I'd be curious to see more case studies illustrating how this "strategic" framing has (or hasn't) held up in tribunals like the ICC or ad hoc courts. A valuable contribution to the conversation on victim protection and the urgent need for consistent accountability.